Unhelpful update descriptions

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 06:15:49PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> 
> At the very least, if you're doing an update for a stable release (so
> okay, Branched is an exception here), you should have a clear reason
> for doing it. You're not supposed to bump to the latest upstream
> release just Because It's There: that's against the update policy.
> AIUI, in the theoretical situation you describe, the maintainer
> should not be issuing an update at all.

That's not readily apparent in the Updates Policy:

Package maintainers MUST:

Avoid Major version updates, ABI breakage or API changes if at all possible.
Avoid changing the user experience if at all possible.
Avoid updates that are trivial or don't affect any Fedora users.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy#All_other_updates

You could maybe define it as falling under the last of those items but
someone could argue equally hard for the reverse.  You'd need an actual
example of an update and what the maintainer was thinking when they pushed
it to map out the territory.

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20130311/6bff3734/attachment.sig>